TEMECULA: Councilmen want to talk about Liberty Quarry land purchase

In this file photo, Temecula City Councilman Mike Naggar sits through the Riverside County Board of Supervisors meeting on Tuesday, Nov. 6. His city opposes the Liberty Quarry surface mine proposal. The board approved a fast track approval process for the mine.

Riverside Countyâs decision to fast-track the highly contested Liberty Quarry project proposal has caused Temeculaâs leaders to wonder aloud what it would take to buy the land and stop the project.

Four-term City Councilman Mike Naggar said he and third-term Councilman Chuck Washington â" both of whom won re-election in Tuesdayâs election, according to unofficial results â" will ask colleagues for a formal discussion on purchasing the land on which Granite Construction is proposing to build a granite mine. A date for the discussion has not yet been set, Naggar said.

âI would like to start that discussion, but there has been no formal action by the City Council,â Naggar said, adding that his preference would be to keep the land as open space. âTo buy it, we would have to finance it, (and) there are a number of financing options.â

Naggar said he floated the idea during the Tuesday, Nov. 6, Riverside County Board of Supervisors meeting where supervisors approved fast-tracking the quarry proposed to be built south of Temecula. The move would allow for the project to go directly from the planning stage to supervisors for approval without first being vetted by the county Planning Commission, which previously denied a similar, though larger, request by the same company.

Granite spokeswoman Karie Reuther said the 414-acre project site comprises as many as 50 individual parcels. Between 2007 and 2011, Granite purchased 251 of those acres for an undisclosed amount. The company also has a confidential option agreement to purchase the remaining 163 acres from two remaining owners.

âWe have had a standing offer to talk to the city for the last seven years and remain open to meet with them,â Reuther said in a written response to questions about the potential discussion. âRight now, we are focused on getting our revised project to a hearing and creating jobs.â

Washington could not be reached for comment Friday.

Temeculaâs leaders and a number of residents have vociferously opposed the project, saying it would increase air pollution, destroy natural habitat and damage ecologically significant land while providing far fewer jobs than Granite claims. The project also is opposed by the Pechanga Band of LuiseÃ±o Indians, who consider the land sacred, and San Diego State University, which operates a scientific research facility in the area.

Supporters of the project tout the economic benefits of providing a local aggregate source, including future revenues to the city and job creation.

Temecula has thrown considerable resources into stopping the project, including filing two lawsuits against Riverside County for its role in moving the project forward through an expedited review process, and appealing to the county for permission to annex the property into Temecula boundaries. The city also sought, but failed, to obtain a temporary restraining order to block county supervisors from fast-tracking the project.

The cityâs two lawsuits remain active. A hearing for one is scheduled for Wednesday, Nov. 14.

Join the conversation

We invite you to use our commenting platform to engage in insightful
conversations about issues in our community. Although we do not pre-screen comments,
we reserve the right at all times to remove any information or materials that are unlawful,
threatening, abusive, libelous, defamatory, obscene, vulgar, pornographic, profane, indecent
or otherwise objectionable to us, and to disclose any information necessary to satisfy the law,
regulation, or government request. We might permanently block any user who abuses these conditions.